545 vs. 300,000,000 People - By Charlie Reese

[Animalhouse]

Charley Reese's final column

Just a Friendly Reminder

A very interesting column. COMPLETELY NEUTRAL
Be sure to Read the Poem at the end.

Charley Reese's final column for the Orlando Sentinel.

He has been a journalist for 49 years.
He is retiring and this is HIS LAST COLUMN.

Be sure to read the Tax List at the end.

This is about as clear and easy to understand as it can be. The article below is completely neutral, neither anti-republican or democrat. Charlie Reese, a retired reporter for the Orlando Sentinel, has hit the nail directly on the head, defining clearly who it is that in the final analysis must assume responsibility for the judgments made that impact each one of us every day. It's a short but good read. Worth the time. Worth remembering!

545 vs. 300,000,000 People

- By Charlie Reese

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The President does.

You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The President can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? John Boehner. He is the leader of the majority party. He and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want. If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility.. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.

If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.

If the Army & Marines are in Iraq and Afghanistan it's because they want them in Iraq and Afghanistan.

If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.

There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy","inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.

They, and they alone, have the power.

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses.

Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.

We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess.


Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.

What you do with this article now that you have read it is up to you. This might be funny if it weren't so true. Be sure to read all the way to the end:

Tax his land,
Tax his bed,
Tax the table,
At which he's fed.

Tax his tractor,
Tax his mule,
Teach him taxes
Are the rule.

Tax his work,
Tax his pay,
He works for
peanuts anyway!

Tax his cow,
Tax his goat,
Tax his pants,
Tax his coat.

Tax his ties,
Tax his shirt,
Tax his work,
Tax his dirt.

Tax his tobacco,
Tax his drink,
Tax him if he
Tries to think.

Tax his cigars,
Tax his beers,
If he cries
Tax his tears.

Tax his car,
Tax his gas,
Find other ways
Taxes to pass

Tax all he has
Then let him know
That you won't be done
Till he has no dough.

When he screams and hollers;
Then tax him some more,
Tax him till
He's good and sore.

Then tax his coffin,
Tax his grave,
Tax the sod in
Which he's laid...

Put these words
Upon his tomb,
'Taxes drove me
to my doom...'

When he's gone,
Do not relax,
Its time to apply
The inheritance tax.

Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL license Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Excise Taxes
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon)
Gross Receipts Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Personal Property Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Service Charge Tax
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
Sales Tax
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax
Telephone Recurring and Nonrecurring Charges Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax


STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY?
Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, and our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.

What in the heck happened? Can you spell 'politicians?'

I hope this goes around THE USA at least 545 times! YOU can help it get there!!!

GO AHEAD. . . BE AN AMERICAN.

- - - Updated - - -


I wanted to share this with the community as I feel it is one of the most important articles written in our time.

As an American I am disgusted at the view people have of us. Americans are despised because of our way of life and foreign policy.
The US foreign policy is NOT the populations decision! Our way of life is dictated by the horrible domestic policies that have the walls closing in around us! This is no free society as we have the worlds highest incarceration rate. Please stop hating Americans because of the gangsters running our government posing as "elected" officials.

[Endus]

STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY?
Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, and our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.

The only reason the USA was "the most prosperous in the world", 100 years ago, was because Europe was in the middle of shelling the hell out of itself in the midst of WWI. Prior to WWI, the USA was still playing catchup, and largely boomed afterwards because it had 1> a large population, and 2> Enough distance from the fronts that their production wasn't ever negatively impacted, so they were the go-to folks to spearhead the rebuilding.

If you made it "120 years ago", the same argument would not hold true.

Worse, the USA is significantly more economically powerful today. Their total GDP is higher than anyone else's, and they're near the top of the lists in terms of GDP per capita as well. The USA, by most measures, the "most prosperous in the world"; this has not changed, and all the policies this guy is speaking against are largely why it has retained and strengthened that position.

[Xeones]

Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, and our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.

Is this an article or a crappy chain email devoid of logic?

[NYC17]

Is this an article or a crappy chain email devoid of logic?

Well, it seems as though while Reese did write a similar article, this one has some bullshit that wasn't written by him, but was added.

So, let's call it both?

[Animalhouse]

The only reason the USA was "the most prosperous in the world", 100 years ago, was because Europe was in the middle of shelling the hell out of itself in the midst of WWI. Prior to WWI, the USA was still playing catchup, and largely boomed afterwards because it had 1> a large population, and 2> Enough distance from the fronts that their production wasn't ever negatively impacted, so they were the go-to folks to spearhead the rebuilding.

If you made it "120 years ago", the same argument would not hold true.

Worse, the USA is significantly more economically powerful today. Their total GDP is higher than anyone else's, and they're near the top of the lists in terms of GDP per capita as well. The USA, by most measures, the "most prosperous in the world"; this has not changed, and all the policies this guy is speaking against are largely why it has retained and strengthened that position.

"all the policies this guy is speaking against are largely why it has retained and strengthened that position."
The only way to be sure of that is if you were to go to an alternate reality where the excessive complex tax system did not exist.

- - - Updated - - -

Is this an article or a crappy chain email devoid of logic?

Devoid of logic? it is quite clear.

[Xeones]

"all the policies this guy is speaking against are largely why it has retained and strengthened that position."
The only way to be sure of that is if you were to go to an alternate reality where the excessive complex tax system did not exist.

That also applies to complaints about the taxes you know?

[Animalhouse]

Well, it seems as though while Reese did write a similar article, this one has some bullshit that wasn't written by him, but was added.

So, let's call it both?

It was penned by Reese in 1985 and then updated by him again in 1995.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/reese.asp

[Xeones]

Devoid of logic? it is quite clear.

What he is trying to say is clear, the logic isn't.

[Animalhouse]

That also applies to complaints about the taxes you know?

So, you think an overly opaque tax system is effective and intelligent over a flat tax?

[NYC17]

It was penned by Reese in 1985 and then updated by him again in 1995.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/reese.asp

Great. Now pinpoint the differences in the one you posted to the one you cited on Snopes.

- - - Updated - - -

So, you think an overly opaque tax system is effective and intelligent over a flat tax?

There's nothing intelligent about a flat tax, so by default, yes.

[Endus]

"all the policies this guy is speaking against are largely why it has retained and strengthened that position."
The only way to be sure of that is if you were to go to an alternate reality where the excessive complex tax system did not exist.

In the reality we're in now, the conclusion he's trying to draw is factually untrue in pretty much every way. The basic premises he pins everything to are false, and thus his entire argument from those (false) premises is misinformed hokum.

The USA is more prosperous today than 100 years ago. That's not really up for debate.

[Masark]

So, you think an overly opaque tax system is effective and intelligent over a flat tax?

Neither is a good answer.

The current American tax system is absurd and a flat tax is also stupid.

[Xeones]

So, you think an overly opaque tax system is effective and intelligent over a flat tax?

A tiered flat tax? Or the so called "fair tax"?

[Endus]

It was penned by Reese in 1985 and then updated by him again in 1995.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/reese.asp

Oh, even better.

It was significantly more wrong when originally written, since the timescale of the "100 years prior" is even more flagrantly incorrect.

[Deleted]

The USA is more prosperous today than 100 years ago. That's not really up for debate.

But its less prosperous than it was 70 years ago!

[Endus]

But its less prosperous than it was 70 years ago!

Not even remotely true.

- - - Updated - - -

Just to be clear, none of the nonsense about taxes or "we were more prosperous back then" was in Reeses' original piece.

Fair enough.

[Deleted]

Not even remotely true.

as a relative thing Endus.
Yes, comparison point was totally picked to look at it Fairly.

[Annoying]

Charley Reese
[...]
COMPLETELY NEUTRAL

Just for the record, Charley Reese was a famous conservative columnist.

For reference, here's the actual article: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...etoes-con-game

Some slimy person who sent you that chain email altered it, by the way, considering all the people they're talking about weren't in office in 1984. Oh, and that "poem" about taxes has nothing to do with Charley Reese, it was created ~2006 and the author is unknown.

[kaze950]

It's pretty clear that the last part wasn't written by the original author; the tonal shift between the responsibility message of the first part and the conservative values ("Mom stayed home to raise the kids") of the second is striking. Not to mention that during WWI (plus the several decades that followed, aside from part of the 20s) we may not have had all those taxes, but the highest income tax bracket hovered between 70-95%.

[Endus]

as a relative thing Endus.
Yes, comparison point was totally picked to look at it Fairly.

That graph is entirely relative; it's GDP productivity per person, and controlled for inflation.

And the point is that, unless you're looking at the immediate slowdown over the last decade or so, the argument that the USA is "less prosperous" today than some prior era is just factually untrue. Doesn't matter what point you're picking on that chart.